tv [untitled] July 11, 2012 8:30am-9:00am PDT
seismic safety oriented. that is a collaboration we would very much like to be continuing. we understand at this point that the intent is to adopt these right now and to work over the next year to work on possible refinements to them. in support of this, the structural engineers association has taken a position of the court in principle of the entire project and one particular product coming out of the capss project. we are permitting our committees to provide technical review in the short run and over the next 30 years as other pieces are a implemented. so we look forward to further collaboration, and at this point, we encourage you to please move forward and pass the a.b.'s. thank you very much. >> any questions?
commissioner walker. commissioner walker: do you want us to move these as we hear them? since we are hearing them altogether. i like to move that we pass -- none >> all three of them. >> are we done with public comment, though? >> yes, i think that was what that was. >> is there any further public comment? >> if you could call the together. >> i do not think we have heard the other two. ok. >> is there a motion to approve items five, six, and 7. >> motion to approve. >> second. >> are all commissioners in favor? >> aye. at any opposed? seeing none, the administrators bulletin's past. item eight, directors report. 8a, update on dbi's finances.
>> yes, pam? then a deputy director, department of building inspection. i apologize. today, we do not have the larger version of the graph, but you have it in your report. i just want to quickly summarize where we are. right now, we have a projected balance of $10.8 million at the end of the year. as i had mentioned before, a lot of this will have to go into our deferred credits because it is prepayment of work that has not been completed. our revenue -- the majority of
the increases, as you can tell -- we are 125% of the budget for charges for services. this is -- a lot of this is due to large projects. we have -- when you look at the year to date increase in permits of $1 million or more for this year compared the last fiscal year, we are seeing a 44% increase. when you look at may alone, because there was an increase in may. april, there was an increase, and there was even more of an increase in may. 2011 versus 2012, you will see 116% increase. that in and of itself shows that we are seeing a rebound in the construction industry, and we are seeing throughout the city
major measures of what would be a positive movement of the economy. in terms of expenses, as you can tell, we are still under spending in our salaries and fringes. we have hired a significant amount of people this last month, and if it is ok, i would like to do my spiel on the new hires first rather than later. we have hired six engineers. we have two that were extended offer letters, but because right now those are temporary positions, we are having a hard time getting something that quickly. we put eight clerks -- eight
clerks the move to a higher level, although a lot of those were already people working for us, so right now, we are still not bringing anybody knew into the apartment, and then we hired a cashier. the total number that has been actually hired, not including the two with the offer, is 15 in this last month. some of them will be coming on in july. as we told you, with engineers, it takes about six months for them to really become effective. that is true of most positions. it takes six months. then, right now, we have 14 requisitions for various levels of positions. some of them we have to wait for the city wide testing to be completed. these are entry-level clerks.
as we mentioned, we are working with dhr on getting exams done. i think they are still on schedule for september. then, we are also requested referrals, which is the first set after dhr approves them, which is a list of the people that we could -- interest. we are moving forward on that. the non-crucial services at this point in time -- we will start making phone calls and making sure that all of our contractors have put in for their reimbursements. services of other departments -- at this point in time, the controller's office mix phone calls all the departments to complete their buildings -- billings. we are moving ahead in trying to do a structural fix in terms
of the vacancies, but this year, preliminarily, it has a positive balance. any questions? and i can you give me a number of how many are not filled at this point? we filled 29 positions? roughly? >> right now today -- i will just give you these high numbers. right now today, we have 51 vacancies in the department. we cannot fill 25 of those. anybody good at math? 36 positions -- 26 positions that we could technically higher. if we had -- if the world were perfect and we had -- you know, civil service did not exist. civil service exists, so we cannot do that, but that is what
we are writing into next fiscal year. we are trying to make sure that we are doing everything we can to ensure that after the tests are done in september that we immediately get people hired in october, which will be tough because people actually have to take the test. it is not just doing the test. but we will try to keep moving through this as fast as we can. this has been, i think, a phenomenal amount of positions we have filled this last month, but as we get closer to some of these others, they are not as easy. we do have very, very close cooperation from the mayor's office. they are not holding any of our requisitions. holding requisitions. the department of human resources is on top of this. in fact, during the budget
hearing right now, they are mentioning that one of the reasons dbi is having difficulty filling the positions is that they are committed to working with us. i am going to talk with dhr to see if they can give us more than a partial persons help to just get through the portion of when we have to do referrals. we have to do, you know, interviews. we have to have people proctor in the interviews. and make sure that we can get more time. we share a person there with several other departments. so that is a little of a challenge. >> of the 26 people that we are going to hire, hopefully, in the land of milk and honey, right now, yours is about 11? is that correct? >> the 26 does not include -- i
mean, i am counting that after we hired these people that we currently have higher now, the 15 we hire, then we have the 26 left. of those in the hopper, we have 14 in the hopper. but because remember, that the way it works is that i get a promotion. somebody has to -- you know, we have to go out and fill your position, so we are trying to stay up with that, but i will be honest with you -- we have some requisitions out into the system approved that we can use as we go through that quick kind of dance that you have to go through when you promote somebody, and then you have to back fill the other ones. commissioner mar: the last time we talked about these vacancies
and somebody from human resources was here, they said they will work with us to bring back some retirees and it in a quicker way so the work would get done, and to help with some of the bad bugs. is that still working? because if we cannot hire because either the lists are old or the civil service tests are slow, it seems like with some of the layoffs that happened -- can we bring back some people that have been -- even the retirees that are pretty familiar with our assistance of they could just get some of the backlog done? >> we have brought everybody back that had been laid off. in terms of going forward and reaching out to people to see if they want to come back, that is really -- if the managers and deputy directors have people in mind, they will quickly, you know, get them plugged in, but
many of the people that were working here -- my understanding is they do not live in this area anymore. they go out and they live in the hinterland, the non-san francisco bay area. but we are trying to do that. prop. f's are good, but you have to identify someone. what that person brings to the table that is specific to the needs of the department. you cannot just do this, kind of global. you have to do it person by person. commissioner mar: i understand that. i just want to make sure we are getting cooperation from the mayor's office. we have identified somebody. there is no problem -- >> we are getting incredible
cooperation. we put in five requisitions, six requisitions last week on a wednesday, and they were approved on thursday. they are constantly, -- in fact, before this meeting, i was talking to our analyst about what is still outstanding and what needs to be done. commissioner mar: ok. commissioner mccarthy: is there any more questions? thank you for the update. just one issue with -- obviously, we spent all day yesterday with the commission. you updated as to what is going on with the budget, which a lot of it relates to what we're talking about, and you have a game plan as to how to address it. >> i am working on a game plan. we had our first hearing with the budget and finance committee, and what happened is that kind of in order, last
thursday, we got a draft of the recommendation, and they were eliminating inspector positions, and i mentioned to them that that was not a good thing, acceptable, so the next day, on friday, they came out with a recommendation to increase our attrition levels so we could have the positions, but that they would take away money. we, of course, reacted against that. they also are trying to reduce some training, over time, materials and supplies, code books, and it totaled $1.7 million. what in essence was happening is that they were making cuts that would have dropped our budget to -- rather than the 4% increase in revenue that we have budgeted for next year, it would drop it
down to 1%. so what we did was -- on monday, we got up and explained -- monday was really about explaining our budget and having them understand what has been happening with trying to fill positions and while we have such a high salary savings. we then have this week to work with the budget analysts office and try to come to some sort of agreement. in doing so, the first thing we did was -- i spent friday afternoon and all day saturday coming up with a detailed hiring plan. we fixed it monday night and sent it over to them. the issue is back -- back --
that they are accurate in saying we have a high salary savings. it would be impossible for us to fill all our positions next year. we believe that the following year we're going to have -- you know, by the end of next year -- if we have an attrition rate, the takeaway 2013, 2014, we will not be in a good position. the issue we are running into is that we are working with the mayor's office and the controller's office on trying to get them to put in a reserve budget for the salary value and
fringe value that they do not think we will be able to use. and then we have the flexibility if it comes to pass that we are able to fulfill positions. we will have the money. we will already be there. it will be appropriated. i think we have a pretty strong case, and the mayor's office will be working with the supervisors on trying to explain things. we have easily proved that they cannot cut back. it is two years ago that we split the amount -- a little less than the amount that we are going to budget. training was a little difficult. but i honestly believe that we will be able to take that cut and still have more than enough to be able to get through our training needs. some of the materials and
supplies, that kind of thing, we as a department have been extremely careful about overspending. i have a plan on that, so we will be fine based on what they are asking for. i think we will be able to work with them to be able to give them what they need to look good. our next hearing will be monday, and we could know by friday if our efforts are successful or whether there needs to be, you know, some sort of, you know -- that the mayor's office will have to work harder on trying to
keep it. i think everybody realizes the administration, the non- executive branch -- i do not really know what they think. i think everybody on our side realizes that this is a bad situation. we need to work together to get our positions filled. damages to hitchhike what you're saying, you are aunts -- you have answered every question. one of the fears we had, which we talked about, was because we are going through the process of hiring people, that would not be used against us, and you want to address those. i think it is very creative how we are trying to do this. at the end of the day, it is costing us, and that is costing a department that is rising right now where we are operating anywhere from 40 people were
were at the height of the market a few years ago. we have to get these people in here to service the customers. it has cost about 52 major projects. forget about the small budget. they alone justifies to be fully staffed to to keep up with that. . oney, i am available. i feel very strongly about this, but the delay in this department, because we need our resources to get back on track. i know you know that. we have got the customer base coming back. the mayor is all about jobs. the mayor is all about getting people back to work. we are a big part of that equation. for us to be even considered to be 1.7 million compared to other departments, who are adding close to hitting the side of reductions, fundamentally, i think it is wrong.
this is what you do so you are in negotiation mode right now, so good luck with that. have we any more comments? >> item 8b, update on proposed legislation. >> good morning, commissioners. legislative and public affairs manager. i just want to point out that the redefinition of efficiency units that supervisor wiener brought to you and you approved last month had a board meeting just recently, and the decision was made to have some more public and what, so that decision in terms of actually introducing it to the board has been postponed to probably
sometime in the middle of july. so that legislation is still very much handy. as you probably know, the planning department is holding a hearing tomorrow trying to create a new definition of student housing. we have been monitoring this because initially, supervisor kim had some potential amendments she was considering in terms of using well- established, vacant buildings to see whether or not those might be converted for possible use as student housing or other low- income housing. as i understand it, the supervisor has withdrawn those amendments for the time being, pending more investigation. there is a certain concern that such a conversion might trigger a a need for a new certificate of occupancy, and if that occurred, it might affect read control as an issue. so the matter is still very much alive and with us. supervisor cohen has introduced
legislation on these additional penalties for foreclosed properties. that is not going to come before the board again before the middle of july, again, because of other issues on the board prosy agenda. the same for supervisor chiu's disability access. he is in the process of trying to help commercial buildings make sure that tenants are renting spaces that meet the ada requirements for federal and state. there is a lot of discussion, especially at the state level, as i'm sure you know, about this, so that matter is still very much alive. i thought you might like to know that on that small business waiver of awning replacement fees, supervisor cu has but four -- supervisor chu has put forward, we ended up with 11 waivers on that, which is the same we had last year without
any incentive program. i would say as far as the pilot was concerned, we did not get any strong indication one way or another that that -- by waiving fees that we actually get people to improve their facades. for all i know, the supervisor might be back next year to try to do this again. >> did we do any outreach on the program? >> yes, we put information out on our counters and also at the website. the supervisor's office was very aggressive in their neighborhoods. actually several, support -- several supervisors were posting it in newsletters. i do not exactly know what the analysis is. maybe people did not see it. in these types of situations, it takes a very long time of impressions in order to get through to people back you could save some money and do yourself a favor by taking advantage of this program.
so there could be more done, obviously, in that regard. as i said, i do not know if the supervisor wants to pursue that again next year or not, but i would not be surprised if she came back. commissioner mar: i was wondering in the discussions on supervisor wiener's legislation on the efficiency units, with the the board thought we should discuss it. it seemed as though there were some moving target pieces of legislation. i know there were some code advisory's about the size. then also, i think the board raised some questions about -- because it was kind of connected to the question of student housing, but it was not really targeted towards students, so there were some questions about that. >> there was not a formal recommendation, at least during the board discussion, that it be sent back, though supervisor wiener recognized and
acknowledged that there had been quite a discussion in both venues. you cannot actually have a separate definition of student housing right now. that is why i guess the planning department is doing what it is doing with its hearing tomorrow, but right now, that is not legal. they could very well, after the july 16 and visitation of this -- i think supervisor w iener -- and that he became clear that the one of more public input on the issue. it will be with us, i think, probably well into the fall. the only other item: on the state legislation -- i think you have a copy of all of this -- is the number one priority is this senate bill 1186, which addresses this issue of
frivolous lawsuits and how to assist small businesses, in particular, in dealing with some of these ada issues. i think part of this is being driven by senator feinstein being in contact with senator steinberg at the state level. there is definitely a whole lot of activity going on, according to the folks i have talked to. there is nothing really new for us to report at this level right now, other than that it may affect how we do to implement some of our enforcement going forward. >> i know in our hearing, and i do not think we closed it out, but have we ever sent a letter of support for what she is doing up there? >> we have not. there's nothing to prevent us from doing so. we could sit in the draft a letter and -- we could certainly
draft a letter. >> that is something i would not mind looking into if we could. i believe we are all on the same page. i could say we have had hearings on it, and we support the measures they are trying to do at the state level. thank you. >> item 8c, update on primary tracking systems. >> the project still is going well and on schedule. we have been working with them on meetings where we have our documentation to be configured and see what they have done in terms of configuration. that is a really important part for our staff to be involved in. we also had an interesting meeting yesterday and got to see how what is called the citizen access -- it is the area that
the citizens can go in and request permits or find out information or see where their permit is in the process, and got an example of what some other agencies -- or it happened to be a couple of states -- had done, and give us some ideas. we are working for work on trying to place -- you know, identify exactly where citizens, interested parties can be involved in the project. we have also been working on identifying source data, doing some data conversion, and we really believe that we will still need the november 2013. it is not in a state that you guys could really look at it now. it is still in a situation where